Loading data...
Loading data...
Analyzing the stock…
70
Gathering technical, fundamental, and market data — a few seconds
Consumer Staples · ·
$190.48
▼ $1.23 (-0.6%)
Market data updated: 09/18 08:32 AM
Fundamentals updated: 09/17/2026
News analyzed: 09/18/2026
Market Cap
$296.88B
Day Range
$188.70 - $192.48
52-Week Range
$142.11 - $207.76
Beta
—
Next Earnings
21.10.2026
PM is a stock from the Consumer Defensive sector — Food, beverages, and household products — steady demand even in a recession, since these are essential consumer goods.
+17.6% (1Y)
Strengths: 15/30 factors positiveRisk: Medium
This score and all analysis on this page are for informational and educational purposes only and do not constitute investment advice. Read the full disclaimer
Weighted: Technical 25% · Fundamental 20% · Growth 15% · Valuation 15% · News 10% · Quality 10% · Risk 5%
Overall Score
🟡 Mixed
Technical Trend
🟢 Bullish
Insiders
🔴 Bearish
Computed directly from the same signals behind the score above — not AI-generated.
Biggest positive driver
Earnings per share (EPS) growth
Earnings per share (EPS) growth: 60.6%
Growth
Biggest negative driver
DCF Fair Value
Estimated fair value: $126.79 vs. price $190.48 (-33.4%)
Fair Value
Signal tension
Growth scores strong (62/100), but fair-value analysis scores this stock as relatively expensive (38/100) — the growth story and the current price aren't fully aligned.
What to watch next
When today echoes the past.
81/100
Similarity
15
Historical Matches
90/100
Analog Quality
-2.2%
Median 40D Outcome
79/100
Pattern Consistency
🟢 Bullish
33%
+2.6% … +3.7%
🟡 Base
7%
-0.3% … -0.3%
🔴 Bearish
60%
-5.7% … -4.4%
Typical timeframe (based on real historical rates clearing a 60% bar): 5 trading days.
📌 Bottom line: Out of 15 similar historical cases for this stock, 33% (95% CI 15%–58%) saw the stock rise within 20 trading days, with a median gain of -3.2%.
Echo #1 — Trend Acceleration
4 occurrence(s) · 50% historical success
Historical outcome rate is not a probability — it's what happened in this specific historical sample, with a 95% confidence range.
| Horizon | Positive rate (95% CI) | Median | 25th–75th pct | Baseline median |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 5D | 13% (4%–38%) | -1.3% | -5.2% … +0.1% | +0.3% |
| 10D | 27% (11%–52%) | -2.3% | -6.1% … +0.7% | +0.5% |
| 20D | 33% (15%–58%) | -3.2% | -5.2% … +2.2% | +0.7% |
| 40D | 33% (15%–58%) | -2.2% | -7.4% … +2.6% | +1.1% |
| 60D | 47% (25%–70%) | -1.5% | -8.8% … +6.9% | +1.2% |
Sample size: 15 analogs, each at least 10 trading days apart (no double-counted overlapping events).
What happened after each historical match (20-day return)
| Date | Similarity | Regime | 20D outcome | 60D outcome |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2022-06-28 | 81/100 | Consolidation | -5.3% | -6.5% |
| 2021-03-08 | 79/100 | Uptrend | +2.6% | +12.1% |
| 2019-05-21 | 79/100 | ✓ Consolidation | -10.6% | -1.5% |
| 2021-08-18 | 78/100 | Consolidation | +1.9% | -5.9% |
| 2021-02-11 | 78/100 | Uptrend | +2.8% | +14.9% |
| 2018-03-07 | 78/100 | ✓ Consolidation | -4.9% | -26.9% |
| 2020-09-16 | 78/100 | Uptrend | -2.1% | +5.4% |
| 2017-08-31 | 77/100 | Consolidation | -5.1% | -12.2% |
| 2025-09-11 | 77/100 | Consolidation | -6.6% | -12.0% |
| 2020-12-03 | 76/100 | Uptrend | +3.8% | +8.5% |
| 2025-08-22 | 75/100 | Consolidation | -5.7% | -11.1% |
| 2023-10-11 | 75/100 | ✓ Consolidation | -3.2% | +3.4% |
| 2026-06-11 | 74/100 | Uptrend | -0.3% | +2.2% |
| 2025-09-26 | 74/100 | Consolidation | -4.4% | -3.1% |
| 2025-12-01 | 74/100 | Consolidation | +3.7% | +19.6% |
Every accepted match is compared to today across 6 domains (price structure, momentum, technical, volatility, volume, relative strength) using z-scored feature distances — no single indicator dominates. Matches within 10 trading days of each other count as one event, not independent evidence. Outcome rates use a Wilson confidence interval (never a raw percentage alone), the mean return is winsorized against extreme outliers, and "Analog Quality" separately captures sample size, data completeness, and regime match — distinct from raw similarity. Relative strength is measured against SPY and against XLP (this stock's sector).
Cross-stock analogs — real other companies, not this stock's own history.
TIME ECHO identifies historical situations that resemble the current market state. Historical outcomes are not guarantees of future performance. Similarity does not imply causation, and results may change as new data becomes available.
🗓️ What Changed This Week
🌱 Building History
We don't have a real data point from a week ago for this stock yet. The weekly comparison will appear once enough history has accumulated.
📊 Score History
63
Today
—
30D
—
90D
—
1Y
🐂🐻 Investment Thesis
🐂 Bull Case
🐻 Bear Case
🔍 What Could Prove This Wrong
This isn't a price-direction forecast — just a synthesis of real, already-computed data, and future conditions that could change the picture.
🧬 STOCK DNA
This stock's profile across 8 real dimensions — a research tool, not a recommendation
Growth
62
Quality
47
Value
38
Momentum
73
Risk
48
Sentiment
100
Fundamental
62
Institutional
0
Stocks with a similar DNA right now
SCANNING PM...
Recent media coverage of Philip Morris International has centered on its financial guidance and strategic shifts, particularly around its smoke-free products. The company raised its 2026 adjusted earnings guidance and participated in a major investor conference, signaling confidence in its outlook. Notably, FDA authorization for its nicotine pouch product, Zyn, and a new brand campaign ("When It Clicks") highlight efforts to expand its U.S. market presence. Analysts also discussed valuation concerns and risks tied to smoke-free growth and regulatory hurdles.
AI summary based on English-language news sources only — not investment advice.
Everyone's writing about Philip Morris International. News trend score: 100. Reason: 12 of the last 20 articles are positive, versus 2 negative.
News trend analysis is based on article sentiment only, and is not investment advice or financial counsel. Read the full disclaimer
🌡️ Emotional Temperature
30
🎯 Conviction (vs. Emotion)
37
Psychology
45
Fundamentals
62
Technical
73
Valuation
38
The price rise has far outpaced the actual improvement in fundamental data.
Extreme momentum, price far above its moving average, and a large premium over fair value.
Price, volume, and sentiment accelerating together — a sign investors are chasing the price, not just following it.
A sharp drop, unusual volume, and negative news sentiment all at once — selling pressure that looks emotional.
The stock is moving in lockstep with its peers at the same intensity, rather than on its own data.
Price (3M)
+7%
Market Narrative
77
Fundamental Reality
37
Narrative Gap
+40
🔀 Psychology Acceleration
News attention/sentiment is running well ahead of the price move itself.
🧠 StockIQ Psychologist
The market’s dominant anchoring behavior suggests traders are fixated on the 1.8% support level, ignoring broader weakness like negative momentum and valuation premiums. Overconfidence (42) and euphoria (26) persist due to the +46% DCF discount, but weak momentum and peer underperformance create friction. The key question is whether traders will break free from support or adjust expectations as the narrative-reality gap (28) widens. Low FOMO (8) and panic (8) scores indicate no extreme urgency, leaving room for cautious reassessment.
Updated: 09/08/2026, 05:38 PM
What could change this?
👥 What the crowd believes
"Philip Morris International Raises 2026 Adjusted Earnings Guidance"
"FDA Authorization Expands Philip Morris’s Zyn Bet"
"PMI U.S. Launches ZYN 'When It Clicks,' a New Brand Platform"
"Philip Morris is downgraded to Hold as valuation tops historical range"
📈 7D Investor Psychology
Signal classification confidence: High (confidence in the behavioral read, not a price prediction). Describes observable market behavior, not what any individual investor thinks, and is not a buy/sell signal.
🏛️ Investor DNA — Historical Investors
A Historical Strategy Simulation: assuming each investor follows their documented principles, how would they rate this stock today? This is not a prediction of what they would actually do.
🟢 Best match
Peter Lynch — 79/100
🔴 Weakest match
Benjamin Graham (Enterprising Investor) — 8/100
🗣️ Why do they disagree?
Based on Peter Lynch's documented principles, the model estimates the stock is a growth candidate, while Edgar Lawrence Smith’s framework rates it as a solid decade‑long hold. Mackay, Housel, and Loeb each assign moderate scores, reflecting crowd excitement, reasonable holdability, and modest risk. Marks, Livermore, Fisher, Bagehot, Schwager, and Graham assign lower scores, citing high expectations, a negative trend, insufficient quality, liquidity concerns, lack of a clear setup, and failure to meet defensive criteria. The efficient‑market view sits near the midpoint, indicating mixed evidence for outperformance versus an index.
Peter Lynch
One Up on Wall Street (1989)
🟢 79
Growth candidate — the price hasn't caught up to the growth
Key question
Is the growth worth the price?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Edgar Lawrence Smith
Common Stocks as Long-Term Investments (1924)
🟢 68
Looks like a real 'buy and hold for a decade' candidate
Key question
Is this a stock I'd be happy to hold and forget about for a decade?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Morgan Housel
The Psychology of Money (2020)
🟡 57
Moderate — holdable, but not effortless
Key question
Could I live with this volatility long enough for compounding to actually work?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Gerald M. Loeb
The Battle for Investment Survival (1935)
🟡 54
Moderate risk to capital
Key question
How much capital could I lose here if I'm wrong?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Jesse Livermore
Reminiscences of a Stock Operator (1923) / How to Trade in Stocks (1940)
🟡 52
No clear trend — Livermore preferred to stay out of this
Key question
What is the price telling me right now?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Burton Malkiel & John Bogle
A Random Walk Down Wall Street (1973) / The Little Book of Common Sense Investing (2007)
🟡 51
Mixed case — the evidence for picking this stock over an index is not strong
Key question
Do I actually have an edge here, or do I just think I do?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Charles Mackay
Extraordinary Popular Delusions and the Madness of Crowds (1841)
🟡 50
Some signs of crowd excitement building
Key question
Am I being swept along with the crowd, or thinking for myself?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Thorstein Veblen
The Theory of Business Enterprise (1904)
🟡 47
Mixed signal on whether growth translates to real profit
Key question
Is management building real value, or just building itself?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Howard Marks
The Most Important Thing (2011) / Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🟡 37
Risk/valuation combination Marks would flag as a caution sign
Key question
What is the market probably misunderstanding about the risk here?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Philip Fisher
Common Stocks and Uncommon Profits (1958)
🔴 34
Doesn't show the quality/growth signature Fisher required
Key question
How exceptional is this business, really?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Howard Marks (Market Cycle)
Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🔴 33
Looks late-cycle — the position Marks would treat with extra caution
Key question
Where are we in the cycle right now — near a hot extreme, or a cold one?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Walter Bagehot
Lombard Street (1873)
🔴 31
Liquidity position Bagehot would flag as a real risk
Key question
Does this company have enough liquidity to survive real stress?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Samuel Armstrong Nelson
The ABC of Stock Speculation (1903)
🔴 28
Cycle looks stretched toward overbought
Key question
Is the price overextended, or is there still room to move?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Jack Schwager
Market Wizards (1989)
🔴 26
No real setup here — the discipline Schwager's wizards shared would say stay out
Key question
What's the risk/reward here, and where is my exit point?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Benjamin Graham
Security Analysis (1934) / The Intelligent Investor (1949)
🔴 19
Fails most of Graham's defensive criteria
Key question
Where is my margin of safety?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Benjamin Graham (Enterprising Investor)
The Intelligent Investor (1949) — the Enterprising Investor chapters
🔴 8
Not statistically cheap enough for the Enterprising Investor's looser safety bar
Key question
Is the stock statistically cheap enough to justify the extra risk?
⚠️ Partial data for this stock — score is less reliable — Data availability: 40%
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Based on the last 300 trading days, calculated from real price data. Click an indicator for details and a chart.
🟢 Most indicators support an uptrend (6 bullish · 2 bearish · 2 neutral)
A market-structure read based purely on real price and volume data — not full classic Wyckoff schematic identification (Phase A-E), but a quantitative analysis of what can reliably be computed: trading ranges, "effort vs. result", volume within the range, and Spring/Upthrust detection.
A pattern consistent with an early/mid distribution phase — a trading range after an advance with declining volume.
Medium confidence
$175.76
Range Bottom
$207.76
Range Top
50
Trading Days in Range
The Wyckoff Method, developed by Richard Wyckoff in the early 20th century, reads the balance of supply and demand through price and volume, based on the premise that large investors ("smart money") quietly accumulate shares before rallies and quietly distribute them before declines. The read here is based solely on real price and volume data — full, precise identification of classic Wyckoff patterns (such as Phases A-E) requires human chart-reading experience and judgment, so this is an approximate algorithmic read, not a substitute for professional analysis. This should not be considered investment advice.
Gross Margin
67.1%
Operating Margin
36.6%
Net Margin
27.9%
EBITDA Margin
41.5%
ROE
-113.5%
ROA
16.4%
ROIC
—
EPS
$7.27
Cash
$4.87B
Total Debt
$168.00M
Current Ratio
0.96
Debt/Equity
-0.02
Total dividend per share paid each year, over the last 5 years.
| Ex-Dividend Date | Amount per Share |
|---|---|
| 25.6.2026 | $1.470 |
| 24.6.2026 | $1.470 |
| 19.3.2026 | $1.470 |
| 18.3.2026 | $1.470 |
| 26.12.2025 | $1.470 |
| 25.12.2025 | $1.470 |
| 3.10.2025 | $1.470 |
| 2.10.2025 | $1.470 |
| 27.6.2025 | $1.350 |
| 26.6.2025 | $1.350 |
| 20.3.2025 | $1.350 |
| 19.3.2025 | $1.350 |
How is Fair Value calculated? →
Current Price
$190.48
Estimated Fair Value (DCF)
$126.79
Model estimate — not a price target. Highly sensitive to growth/discount-rate assumptions.
Gap
-33.4%
🔴 Appears expensive relative to estimated value
Year 1 Growth Rate
8.6%
Discount Rate (WACC)
9.0%
Terminal Growth Rate
2.5%
Projection Years
5
| Year | Growth Rate | Projected FCF | Present Value |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 8.6% | $11.58B | $10.62B |
| 2 | 7.1% | $12.40B | $10.43B |
| 3 | 5.5% | $13.08B | $10.10B |
| 4 | 4.0% | $13.61B | $9.64B |
| 5 | 2.5% | $13.95B | $9.07B |
Base FCF (last actual year)
$10.66B
Terminal Value
$219.98B
Present Value of Terminal Value
$142.97B
Enterprise Value
$192.84B
Net Debt
$-4.70B
Equity Value
$197.54B
*The DCF model is an estimate based on assumptions — not a guaranteed forecast. You can change the assumptions to examine different scenarios.
Book Value per Share
-$6.41
Tangible Book Value per Share (Tangible NAV)
-$24.48
Sentiment based on basic keywords (not AI) — 12 positive, 6 neutral, 2 negative out of the last 20 articles.
Yahoo · 17.9.2026
Yahoo · 17.9.2026
Yahoo · 16.9.2026
Yahoo · 15.9.2026
Yahoo · 15.9.2026
Yahoo · 15.9.2026
Yahoo · 15.9.2026
Yahoo · 14.9.2026
Yahoo · 13.9.2026
24/7 Wall St. · 13.9.2026
Benzinga · 12.9.2026
SeekingAlpha · 11.9.2026
Yahoo · 11.9.2026
Zacks · 11.9.2026
SeekingAlpha · 11.9.2026
Benzinga · 11.9.2026
Yahoo · 10.9.2026
Bloomberg · 10.9.2026
Benzinga · 10.9.2026
MT Newswires · 10.9.2026
Philip Morris International (PM) currently has a StockIQ AI score of 63/100, rated "Moderate". The score is a weighted average across up to 7 categories (technical, fundamental, growth, fair value, news, quality, risk), based on real data only.
PM currently scores 63/100 (Moderate) across the categories we measure. StockIQ doesn't give buy/sell recommendations — use this as one data point in your own research, not as investment advice.
Per StockIQ's DCF model, PM's estimated fair value is $126.79, which is 33.4% below the current price of $190.48. This is one valuation model among several signals in the fair-value category, not a price target.
PM's technical score is 73/100, which currently reads as bullish — based on real price/volume signals (moving averages, RSI, MACD, and more), not a prediction of what happens next.
Based on the real signals StockIQ computed: Earnings per share (EPS) growth: 60.6%; Net income growth: 60.8%; Debt/equity: -0.02.
Based on the real signals StockIQ computed: Estimated fair value: $126.79 vs. price $190.48 (-33.4%); Operating margin is eroding over time; Current ratio: 0.96.
Yes — PM has a real recorded dividend payment history on StockIQ. See the Dividends section on this page for the actual per-share amounts and dates.
Real transactions by officers and insiders, as reported to the SEC on Form 4 — 0 purchases and 5 sales out of the last 25 filings.
| Name | Transaction Type | Date | Shares | Change | Price |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Combes Michel | Grant/Award from Employer | 6.5.2026 | 1,119 | +1,119 | $169.93 |
| Hook Lisa | Grant/Award from Employer | 6.5.2026 | 1,119 | +1,119 | $169.93 |
| Morparia Kalpana | Grant/Award from Employer | 6.5.2026 | 1,119 | +1,119 | $169.93 |
| Geissler Werner | Grant/Award from Employer | 6.5.2026 | 1,119 | +1,119 | $169.93 |
| Polet Robert | Grant/Award from Employer | 6.5.2026 | 1,119 | +1,119 | $169.93 |
| Yanai Shlomo | Grant/Award from Employer | 6.5.2026 | 1,119 | +1,119 | $169.93 |
| Bough Bonin | Grant/Award from Employer | 6.5.2026 | 1,119 | +1,119 | $169.93 |
| Harker Victoria D | Grant/Award from Employer | 6.5.2026 | 1,119 | +1,119 | $169.93 |
| Calantzopoulos Andre | Grant/Award from Employer | 6.5.2026 | 1,119 | +1,119 | $169.93 |
| Calantzopoulos Andre | Grant/Award from Employer | 6.5.2026 | 588,782 | +1,119 | $169.93 |
| Hook Lisa | Grant/Award from Employer | 6.5.2026 | 20,060 | +1,119 | $169.93 |
| Harker Victoria D | Grant/Award from Employer | 6.5.2026 | 4,537 | +1,119 | $169.93 |
| Geissler Werner | Grant/Award from Employer | 6.5.2026 | 98,356 | +1,119 | $169.93 |
| Yanai Shlomo | Grant/Award from Employer | 6.5.2026 | 10,120 | +1,119 | $169.93 |
| Bough Bonin | Grant/Award from Employer | 6.5.2026 | 11,297 | +1,119 | $169.93 |
| Polet Robert | Grant/Award from Employer | 6.5.2026 | 29,765 | +1,119 | $169.93 |
| Morparia Kalpana | Grant/Award from Employer | 6.5.2026 | 28,236 | +1,119 | $169.93 |
| Combes Michel | Grant/Award from Employer | 6.5.2026 | 11,643 | +1,119 | $169.93 |
| Dobrowolski Reginaldo | Tax Withholding in Shares | 6.3.2026 | 22 | -22 | $169.98 |
| Dobrowolski Reginaldo | Tax Withholding in Shares | 6.3.2026 | 7,232 | -22 | $169.98 |
| Kennedy Stacey | Open Market Sale | 20.2.2026 | 14,350 | -14,350 | $183.13 |
| Dobrowolski Reginaldo | Open Market Sale | 20.2.2026 | 5,000 | -5,000 | $183.46 |
| Dobrowolski Reginaldo | Open Market Sale | 20.2.2026 | 1,000 | -1,000 | $183.58 |
| Kennedy Stacey | Open Market Sale | 20.2.2026 | 45,301 | -14,350 | $183.13 |
| Dobrowolski Reginaldo | Open Market Sale | 20.2.2026 | 21,182 | -5,000 | $183.46 |
Official FINRA data — the number of shares open in short positions, plus daily short-sale activity.
16,588,937 shares short as of 2026-08-31 · vs. 16,127,996 on 2026-07-31
Official biweekly report (FINRA Rule 4560) — no real higher-frequency data exists for this metric.
58.3% of trading volume this week was short selling, vs. 47.1% the prior week
Based on daily short-sale volume (Reg SHO) — a different metric from the open short interest above: this is daily trading volume, not an open position, so it updates weekly rather than biweekly.
Full breakdown of every data type and its source: Data Sources · Methodology